Cognitive Systems and the Scientific Explanation of Cognition

Author(s):  
Marco Giunti

A cognitive system is any real system that has some cognitive property. Therefore, cognitive systems are a special type of K-systems (see chapter 3, section 3). Note that this definition includes both natural systems such as humans and other animals, and artificial devices such as robots, implementations of AI (artificial intelligence) programs, some implementations of neural networks, etc. Focusing on what all cognitive systems have in common, we can state a very general but nonetheless interesting thesis: All cognitive systems are dynamical systems. Section 2 explains what this thesis means and why it is (relatively) uncontroversial. It will become clear that this thesis is a basic methodological assumption that underlies practically all current research in cognitive science. The goal of section 3 is to contrast two styles of scientific explanation of cognition: computational and dynamical. Computational explanations are characterized by the use of concepts drawn from computation theory, while dynamical explanations employ the conceptual apparatus of dynamical systems theory. Further, I will suggest that all scientific explanations of cognition might end up sharing the same dynamical style, for dynamical systems theory may well turn out to be useful in the study of all types of models currently employed in cognitive science. In particular, a dynamical viewpoint might even benefit those scientific explanations of cognition which are based on symbolic models. Computational explanations of cognition, by contrast, can only be based on symbolic models or, more generally, on any other type of computational model. In particular, those scientific explanations of cognition which are based on an important class of connectionist models cannot be computational, for this class of models falls beyond the scope of computation theory. Arguing for this negative conclusion requires the formal explication of the concept of a computational system that I gave in chapter 1 (see definition 3). Finally, section 4 explores the possibility that scientific explanations of cognition might be based on Galilean models of cognitive systems (see chapter 3, section 5). Most cognitive scientists have not yet considered this possibility. The goals of this section are to contrast this proposal with the current modeling practice in cognitive science, to make clear its potential benefits, and to indicate possible ways to implement it.

Author(s):  
Marco Giunti

Currently there is growing interest in the application of dynamical methods to the study of cognition. Computation, Dynamics, and Cognition investigates this convergence from a theoretical and philosophical perspective, generating a provocative new view of the aims and methods of cognitive science. Advancing the dynamical approach as the methodological frame best equipped to guide inquiry in the field's two main research programs--the symbolic and connectionist approaches--Marco Giunti engages a host of questions crucial not only to the science of cognition, but also to computation theory, dynamical systems theory, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of science. In chapter one Giunti employs a dynamical viewpoint to explore foundational issues in computation theory. Using the concept of Turing computability, he precisely and originally defines the nature of a computational system, sharpening our understanding of computation theory and its applications. In chapter two he generalizes his definition of a computational system, arguing that the concept of Turing computability itself is relative to the kind of support on which Turing machine operate. Chapter three completes the book's conceptual foundation, discussing a form of scientific explanation for real dynamical systems that Giunti calls "Galilean explanation." The book's fourth and final chapter develops the methodological thesis that all cognitive systems are dynamical systems. On Giunti's view, a dynamical approach is likely to benefit even those scientific explanations of cognition which are based on symbolic models. Giunti concludes by proposing a new modeling practice for cognitive science, one based on "Galilean models" of cognitive systems. Innovative, lucidly-written, and broad-ranging in its analysis, Computation, Dynamics, and Cognition will interest philosophers of science and mind, as well as cognitive scientists, computer scientists, and theorists of dynamical systems. This book elaborates a comprehensive picture of the application of dynamical methods to the study of cognition. Giunti argues that both computational systems and connectionist networks are special types of dynamical systems. He shows how this dynamical approach can be applied to problems of cognition, information processing, consciousness, meaning, and the relation between body and mind.


1998 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 643-644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert Jaeger

Cognitive systems are wilder than today's dynamical systems theory can handle. Cognitive systems might be tamed in principle, but the very notion of a dynamical system will change in the process.


Author(s):  
Maurice Lamb ◽  
Anthony Chemero

Dynamical systems theories describe a wide range of theoretical orientations in cognitive science. In this chapter we focus on a particular formulation of dynamical systems theory that provides a strong theoretical basis for some of the claims made by 4E approaches to cognition. In particular, the target dynamical systems approaches depend on two hypotheses. First, the interaction hypothesis states that the states and behaviors of any entity in a cognitive system are highly dependent on the states and behaviors of some other entity or set of entities. Second, the openness hypothesis states that cognitive systems only persist in the context of other systems. Taken together, these hypotheses entail that the boundaries of cognitive systems should not be taken for granted, and that there are both metrics and reasons for empirically investigating how cognitive systems may be bounded and how those boundaries might change.


1998 ◽  
Vol 53 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 639-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Achim Stephan

Abstract In different disciplines such as philosophy of mind, dynamical systems theory, and connec­tionism the term ‘emergence’ has different jobs to perform. Therefore, various concepts of emergence are developed and examined. While weaker versions are compatible with prop­erty reductionism, stronger versions are not. Within philosophy of mind, particularly within the qualia debate there is a need for a strong notion of emergence, while in discussions of emergent properties of connectionist nets or of dynamical systems one can do with weaker notions of emergence.


Author(s):  
Ezequiel A. Di Paolo ◽  
Thomas Buhrmann ◽  
Xabier E. Barandiaran

For the last two decades, research in cognitive science has increasingly turned toward notions of embodiment and situatedness. Some approaches also foreground the relevance of personal experience and embodied action in forming the basis of sense-making. In particular, “enactivist” perspectives have started to make a profound change in the way we conceive our minds as animate and embodied, as opposed to brain-bound information processing architectures. Braiding phenomenology, cognitive science, and dynamical systems theory, enactivism offers a series of proposals for understanding the sensorimotor basis of cognition, and introduces the concept of sensorimotor life. This chapter presents the broad motivations for these proposals and situates them within their broader scientific and philosophical contexts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document